Commentary: Overview
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Commentary: Overview The writing of commentaries has been and contin- studies, however, it has led to a certain neglect of ues to be one of the fundamental literary activities of commentarial literature due to a mistaken assump- Buddhists everywhere. For more than two thousand tion of lack of creativity (Kramer, 2013). In the years, going back to the earliest days of the tradition, Buddhist world as in the Latin world, the 5th cen- commentaries have been used to learn and teach tury marks the consolidation of earlier exegetical the words of the Buddha, to transmit their form and material into comprehensive commentaries on content faithfully, and to systematize and develop which following generations of scholars built. In Buddhist doctrine. parallel with these “literary” commentaries, the pro- A commentary can be defined as a sustained duction of “curricular” commentaries rooted in an textual mediation of the meaning and form of a instructional setting and based on either teachers’ culturally significant root text, or more simply the or students’ notes continued to be a powerful force “continuous explication of text” (Guthmüller, 2013), throughout the history of Buddhism (Ganeri, 2011, to distinguish it from the more localized and occa- 113–114; Krasser, 2011). Some of these curricular com- sional type of explication represented by glosses. At mentaries were elaborated and crossed over into the the same time, the very word “commentary” indi- literary tradition; others remained ephemeral, yet cates, for the Western European tradition, a gradual formed and continue to form the backbone of local evolution from glosses into the new literary genre of Buddhist instruction (McDaniel, 2008, 191–204). commentary: Latin commentarium originally meant “collection of notes (commenta)” (OED, 2012, s.v.; the same relationship holds between the Indian terms Principles and Classification vārttika and vṛtti). It took until the 5th century ce for such notes to develop into the first full‐fledged com- The main subgenres of Buddhist commentary are mentary (Servius’s commentary on Virgil), and by the following: the 12th century, Latin commentaries had become 1. lexical and grammatical explanation of the the “most important form of scholarly literature” in language of their root texts; Europe (Guthmüller, 2013). What we have is thus 2. scholastic, philosophical, and juridical elabo- a development from paratext to an independent ration of their root texts’ content; and work that stands in a truly intertextual relationship 3. narrative explanation of root texts that could with its root text, with which it may engage selec- develop a life of its own (as with the explana- tively and in a topical order of its own choice. Early tory background narratives that have been Buddhist commentaries not only performed the added separately to the Pali and Chinese ver- same task of continuous explication as the Latin sions of the Dharmapada verse collection). commenta but also served as a tool for the rational While any given commentary can be categorized as organization of the teachings of the Buddha col- primarily belonging to one of these subgenres, com- lected in the early Buddhist canons. From the very mentaries often combine characteristics of more beginning, this organization entailed differences of than one subgenre. A basic categorization of the opinion and organizational principles among vari- services provided by Buddhist commentaries would ous authorities. In the course of time, Buddhist com- consist of linguistic and factual explanation, textual mentators gradually assumed a voice of their own criticism (discussing variant readings), and higher and developed original doctrinal and philosophical criticism. That is, commentaries attempt to explain systems, while keeping to the literary form of com- terms, provide information on allusions, and so on; mentary. This strategy allowed them to assert conti- or they offer textual information (this may overlap nuity with their tradition, while the different layers with the first category, e.g. if a term is replaced); of root text and commentary facilitated the use of or a commentary may reflect on the meaning and complex argument structures (Slaje, 2007, 73–74; message of a text or elucidate its underlying, sal- Ganeri, 2011, 114–115); in the history of Buddhist vifically relevant meaning, which often involves the © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2015 BEB, vol. I Also available online – www.brill 410 Commentary: Overview collection, discussion, and refutation of different on interpretation, the Vyākhyāyukti (Princi ples authoritative opinions. of Exegesis; c. 5th cent.), as (1) establishment The Buddhist traditions of India developed their of the purpose of the commentary (prayojana), own formulations of the principles and purposes of (2) statement of the overall meaning (piṇḍārtha), commentarial activity. The Catuṣpratisaraṇasūtra (3) explanation of the meanings of words (padārtha), (Discourse on the Four Resorts), extant in several (4) demonstration of connections with other Sanskrit versions and in Chinese, lays down the Buddhist texts and elements of Buddhist doctrine following four “resorts” for the commentator: the (anusaṃdhi), and (5) refutation of objections teaching itself (dharma) should be followed, not (codyaparihāra), building on a similar list in the the person of any particular teacher (puruṣa); the Vivaraṇasaṃgrahaṇī chapter of the Yogācārabhūmi meaning (artha) of the teaching should be followed, (Nance, 2012, 105–120, 167–212). This Buddhist list not its specific formulation (vyañjana); teachings of five terms resembles (and possibly inspired) a with clear meaning (nītārtha) should be followed more general conception of the services of a clas- rather than those whose meaning needs establishing sical Indian literary or scholastic commentary that (neyārtha); and direct knowledge (jñāna) should be persisted into modern times. One may compare followed rather than discursive knowledge (vijñāna; for instance the enumeration of five exegetical Lamotte, 1949; Davidson, 1990). services in a verse quoted in the 19th‐century com- This early canonical set of four “resorts” partly pendium Nyāyakośa (Treasury of Nyāya Philoso- overlaps with four kinds of “discrimination” that the phy; Jhaḷakîkar, 1893): padaccheda (word division), Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra (Discourse Resolving Diffi- padārthokti (stating the meaning of words), vigraha culties; c. 3rd cent. ce) presents as characteristic of (compound resolution), vākyayojanā (construal of the communicative abilities of a bodhisattva (and sentences), ākṣepasamādhāna (answering of objec- thus to be imitated by the ideal commentator): dis- tions; Tubb & Boose, 2007, 3–5). crimination (pratisaṃvid) concerning the words of As Buddhist commentarial literature developed, the teaching (dharma), the meaning of the teaching a broad range of terminology came into use to dis- (artha), linguistic shape (nirukti), such as dialectal tinguish (at least for us today not always clearly) differences, and lucidity (pratibhāna; Nance, 2012, between types and subtypes of commentaries. The 59–60). The first two of these abilities are prerequi- earliest types of Buddhist commentary are called sites for understanding the word of the Buddha, the vibhaṅga and nirdeśa. The Sanskrit tradition of other two for communicating it to any given audi- mainland India knows the terms bhāṣya (with ence. A special case of the latter is the translation of which comp. Patañjali’s grammatical commentary Buddhist scriptures into non‐Indian languages, and Mahābhāṣya [Great Commentary]; c. 2nd cent. bce), some commentaries were composed to serve pre- vyākhyā, vṛtti, vivaraṇa, ṭīkā, and more. The Pali tra- cisely this purpose (e.g. the Udānavargavivaraṇa; dition of Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia developed a Explanation of the Chapters of Inspired Utterances; different set of terms: aṭṭhakathā, ṭīkā, atthayojanā, see below). gaṇṭhipadavivaraṇa, and others. Looking beyond The twin exegetical concerns with dharma and Buddhism, the various layers of Jaina commentarial artha have an echo in the modern scholarly distinc- literature present a similar mixture of pan‐Indian tion between Textpflege and Sinnpflege (“curation of and specific terminology: bhāsa, nijjutti, and cuṇṇi text” and “curation of meaning”; comp. Freiberger, for Prakrit commentaries and vṛtti and ṭīkā for 2000, 24, adopting terminology from Assmann & Sanskrit commentaries (Balbir, 2009, 48–53; for the Assmann, 1987). The third term in the modern classi- terminology of Sanskrit philosophical literature, see fication of commentarial purposes – Zensur, the dis- also Ganeri, 2011, 103). This general situation is mir- tinction between authentic and unauthentic texts rored in European humanist and Renaissance com- and the establishment of a canon – likewise consti- mentaries: “very many terms applied to [them], not tutes a traditional Buddhist concern, as reflected for always displaying any clear distinction . (commen- instance in the Mahāpadeśasūtra (Great Discourse tarius, interpretatio, enarratio, expositio, explicatio, on Criteria [for Authenticity]; Lamotte, 1947; David- adnotationes, glossae, scholia etc.)” (Guthmüller, 2013). son, 1990). Over time, particularly important canonical texts The specific methods employed by commen- attracted whole clusters of commentaries. These taries to accomplish these aims are enumer- may be considered “commentarial complexes,” ated in Vasubandhu’s very influential reflection because the multiple layers of commentaries